F 44Q 




L *t*tC7 




.0552 ! 




;| 




















■;2 


^^^^^1 



BK!!tty:{ij»Ki!;griiitttt8!!iMa!JtiH}HHi' 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



DDDDlVHSEfll 



6^ .^L'^.\, 



S^ ^. o 



















•#>> ^ 
-^•o* 






















y ^ 


















A SERMO!\, 




DELIVERED IN TIIF, 



KCO.VD CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH, NORWICH 



^i^ the fourth of July, 1834. 



AT THE HEaUEST OF THE 



*t nth Slavery Society of J\*orivich, fJonnecticul. 



.t^- 



^ 






BY JAMES T^DICKINSOx\, 
Pastor of the Second Congregational Churclj 



ROCHESTER: 
RE-PRIJsTED BY HOYT & PORTER. 

1835. 









%. 



SERMON 



Proverbs, x:cxi. 9. 

' Upen thy moutlij judge righteously, and piead tlie cause of the poor 
and needy.'' 

ECCLESIASTES, iv. I. 

" So I returned and considered all the oppressions that art under the sun : 
and behold the tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no comforter : 
and on the side of the oppressors there was power; but they had no coni 
forter." 

Jeremiah, xxii. 3. 

" Thus saith the Lord : Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and de 
liver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor; and done wrong." 



The Bible speaks with great frequency, and in terms of unineasured 
severity, of the sin of oppression. Take as a specimen such language 
as the following : Wo unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that 
write grievonsness lohich they have prescribed ; to turn aside the needy from 
judgment, and to take away the right from the poor of my jyeople. Rob 
not the poor, because he is poor ; neither oppress the ajjlicted in the gate : 
for the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled 
them. Jehovah represents himself as taking the part of the oppressed ; 
For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, will I arise 
saith the Lord. The Lord executeth righteousness and judgment for all 
that are oppressed. Ha shall save the children of the needy, and shall 
break in pieces the oppressor. Anyone who has never examined the 
Bible with reference to this subject, will be surptised to find how much it 
contains respecting oppression. Passages without number might be 
quoted, similar to those already cited. It may be considered then a point 
settled, that God frowns upon oppression, and considers the oppressor as 
.1 sinnen 



Tliat modern slave-holding is oppression, and oppression too oi tiit 
uorst kind, is another point that can be established with equal certainty. 
Individuals there indeed are, that are calltd slave-holders, who render to 
iheir servants "that which is just and equal." But these are slave-hold- 
ers only in }utme. When we speak of slave-holding, we hiean that sys- 
tem which claims the right of buying and selling human beings, of tearing 
asunder families, of whhholding wages, and of shutting out instruction, 
and consequently the Bible. This system we say is a system of opprcs 
sion, and therefore is regarded by the Bible as sin. Those persons who 
are nominally slave-holders, but who do not claim the right of prop 07- 1 ij in 
their servants, nor withhold from them a reasonable compensation for theii 
labor, nor deny them instruction and the Bible, are not slave-holders in 
fact, whatever they may be in form or name. When we speak of slave- 
liolders, we do not mean them. We however believe the number of this 
class of persons in our country to be small ; for if the number were con- 
.-riderable, we should see the petitions going up to the legislatures of the 
.sR\ eral states for the repeal of oppressive laws : we should see them uni- 
ting their eflbrts, and doing all in their power to put an end to the sys- 
lem of slavery. But we see no such thing. It is evident that a majori- 
ly of our countrymen, at least, are willing that the oppression should 
continue ; for its continuance depends only upon the will of the majority. 
Let the will of the majority be changed, and slavery will cease. What 
'.ve propose to do is, to act upon this will until it is changed. 

I stand before you, my friends, to-day, as the a.ppointed organ of the 
Anti-Slavery Society of Norwich and vicinity, to explain and vindicate its 
doctrines and plans. But we shall be asked at once, Why preach on this 
subject at the North? Why form an Anti-Slavery Society in Norwich, 
when there are no slaves here ? True there are no slaves in Norwich, but 
there are men in Norwich who, in conjunction with their countrymen, 
hold slaves in the District of Columbia, and in the Territories of Arkan- 
sas and Florida. The citizens of Norwich are just as much responsi- 
l)le for the continuance of slavery in the District of Columbia and the 
United States Territories, as the citizens of South Carolina are for the 
'jontinuance of slavery in that state. The free slates, being the majority, 
have the power and the right to set at liberty twenty-six thousand slaves. 
i''very person who does not petition Congress on this subject, and exert 
Ills whole influence to procure the liberation of these twenty-six thousand, 
participates in the guilt of slave holding. Every person who holds sen- 
timents in relation to slavery, \\hich, if held by all, would allow Congress 
*o remain inactive, and thus keep in bondage these twenty-six thousand 
liuraan beings, is chargeable with sin. Every person whose sentiments 
in regard to slavery are correct, but who does not exert his influence to 
<;xtend those sentiments, is also chargeable wiih sin. There is need, 
then, of an anti-slavery society among us. We need such a society to cor- 
rect and embody public sentiment, and cause it to bear against this sin. — 
The opinion prevails here, that we have no right to meddle with this sub- 
ject. This opinion is entirely wrong and must be corrected. We not 
only have a right to meddle with it, but it is our positive duty, and we 
eommitsin if we do not meddle with it ; for so long as we refuse to act 
i>n this subject, wo arc holding our fellow-creatures in bondage, by con- 



tributing our intiuenoc to the upholding of thut public scnliaicnt which 
upholds the systein of slavery. But besides our obligations (o ihe twen- 
ty-six thousand slaves referred to, we bave duties to peiform to our South- 
ern brethren in relation to this subjtct. V* e are buund to show them 
their duty. The opinion has been ahno.^i universal in the iVee states, that 
we have no right to interfere with slavery at the South. li' by interference 
it be meant that we have no right to instij;,ato the slave.-- to rebellion, or 
that Congress has no right to nulhfy the laws of any of the >tates, we 
most fully grant such interfernre would' be wrong. But who has ever 
dreamed of such interference as this? Abohtionists have not. They 
have always distinctly disclaimed .-uch intentions. If by interference, it 
be meant that we have no right to preach or publish the truth to our South- 
ern biethrea, then we say the opinion if wrong. It is not only our 
right, but our duty, to point out to them the sin of >htvt'-h()lding, just as it 
is our duty to show to tlie C hine^e, the Hindoo, and ti:e Sandwich Island- 
er, the sin of idolatry. Our duty to the people of the South is in >ome 
respects more imperative than ou tiuty to the pe<<|de ol other lands — 
They are our countrymen; and they are ciierishiiig a mh which is brin;:ing 
disgrace upon our country in the eyes ot ihe whole world, anri whtcli 
threatens to draw down ujion us the vengeance of the God oi'the oppress- 
ed. When thcretbre we see them buymg and selling then fellow nicn, 
separiting husbands from wives, and paren's fromt liildren ; when we see 
them enacting laws v.hich forbid their uislruction, and thus shutting them 
out from the Bible, we are bound to tell ihem that ; uch things are smt'ul, 
and t.:at they ought to repent. Will it be objected that we have never 
lived at the South, and are not so well qualified to judge -^f the guilt of slave- 
ry as those who are on the -pot ; and thut consequently we had better 
leave the work of refbrmatio' to those who are best acq ainted with the sin? 
Il is true we are not so well acquainted uith the sin as they are; and for 
that vrij reason we think we ar better quahlied to expose it and put it 
(i wn. Is not the m.an who drinks only water the best person to expose 
the evils of drunkenness, and moderate drinking, and rumsclHiig] Must 
he estabiish a dram-shop, and watch the operation of the business, before 
he can tell whether it is sinful? Must he iiecome a drunkard himseli', be- 
fore he can know the evils of d> inking? Obviously, the more tem()erate 
he is, the better qualified he is to be a temperance reformei. Ihe same 
rule holds tiue in regard to all other sin . The less wekni)W of sin oruc- 
tically, 4'ie better qualified we are to put di>wn sin. Who are the best 
men to put down the theatre and the gaining house ? PIair.lv, not the men 
who frequent the theatre — notthe men who aref umd in the gaming ho';se? 
Who, then, ate the best men to exp'.>se tlie sin of lavery ? Those certain- 
ly who are the least acquainted with it. We at the North, therefore are 
better qualified than the people of the South to commence and carry 
forward tliis reformation. We are at least b^und to liberate our own 
sla\es in the District of Columbia and the Territories, and to reason with 
all our countrymen until we persuade them to liberate theirs. 

We proceed now to set forth what we believe to be the true doc.trinein 
regai-d to slavery. Our doctrine is, thata// slave-holding is sin — meaning by 
slave-holding, the claiuiinii andexeicising of the r;ght of property in man, 
of having and selling human beings, of separating families, of witnhohl- 

M 





iiig ihe Bible, and of refusing coinpensaliou for services. Those ^vh(> 
iJcny the sinfuhiess of slave-holding, are always carcftil to give such a 
liefinition of slavery as to include those few persons who are only nonnnol 
slave-holders. They tnuke their definition loo-se and indelinite, as.if ibi 
fhe very purpose of palliating the sin. I have read with grief the apolo- 
gies for slave-holding, in the form of loose definiiions, which have been 
.-.pread Ix^foro the community by son.e of our best men, and by our mo.-t 
respectable religious jjeriodicals. The Christian Spectator, in an ariiclo 
1)11 skivery, uses the fdlluwing language: "It is necessary to define dis- 
linctly the subject in debate, viz : What is slavery ? Before attempting a 
direct answer to this question, it is to be remarked (liat there are many 
varieties of slavery ; that the laws of dificrenlconntries and ages limit and 
modify the relations of master and slave, in manv dilTerent degrees ; and that 
therel'ore the ans^wer ought to I'nclude slavery in all its tbrms." Rut wc 
would ask, what have we to do with slavery in other countries, and other 
iiges ? The inquiry respects slavery in our own country. When the 
friends of temperance institute an inquiry into the effects of ardent spirits 
as used in our country, tlvy do not consider it necessary to extend the in- 
quiry to wine and opium, and every thing of the kind, which has been 
used in all countries and in all ages. Why then attempt to include cveiy 
species of servitude in a definiiion of American slavery ? but let us hear 
the definition which the Spectator finally gives of slavery. "It is an ar- 
tificial relation, or civil constitution, by which one man is invested witii 
[iropeity in the labor of another, to whom, by virtue of that relation, ho 
owes the duties of protection, support and government, and who owes 
him in return, obedience and submission." This definition, it will be seen 
includes a|)prenticeship, a? well as slavery. The master is invested with 
property in the labor of his apprentice, as really as the slave-holder is in 
(he labor of his slave. With such a definition, it is not strange that the 
writer should be able to show that slave holding does not necessarily in> 
ply guilt, and that immediate emancipation is not necessarily a duty. 

The American Quarterly Observer, in an article on the Declaration of 
American Independence, advances similar sentiments. Tlie writer no 
Vihere gives a formal definition of slavery, but the Ibilowing passage will 
convey some idea of his views on this subject: "Slavery is not a malinn 
ill se, but a nudum per conscqiicnda ; not possessing in itself any mora! 
quality whatsoever, but taking its moral hue from the accompanying cir- 
cumstances, from the various physical relations of the parties to one an- 
other, and the motives, feelings and views of the masters in retaining theii 
slaves in bondage." Allowing this doctrine to be correct, we might with 
equal propriety say that rum-selling in itself considered has no moral 
ipiality whatever. When sold for medical purposes, or for any purpose 
evcept as a diink for persons in health, it is an entirely innocent business. 
And yet if we open one of the reports of the American Temperance So- 
ciety, we read that ^'between the. traffic in ardent spirits and a profession 
irf Ike Christian religion there is a total hostilttij.^' We turn to another 
page, and read over the places where rum is sold should be written, " The 
vay to hell, going down to the chambers of death." W^e read on, and 
( ome to this assertion, " Distillei'S, retailers and drimlards arc cidpritsin 
Ihe erirs of all sober men.-' Now we ask. why do not those who denounce 



abolitionists for calling slave-holding a sin, arraign the American Temper- 
ance Society for using such unqualified language in respect to the irafiic 
in ardent spiiits, when it is known that there are men who sell ardent 
spirits from good motives? "When we attack any sin, we attack some 
Ibrm of it that is known to exist, and wc use language that is general. — 
When we attack rum-selling, we mean rum-selling as it is commonh 
practised, without stoppuig to make the exceptions. When we attack 
slave-holding we mean such .-lave-hoiding as is common m our country. 
If any persons are slave-holders only in name, and we suppose there arc 
a few such, let it be understoed ihat we have no controversy with them. 

We come now to the question, What is slavery ? and we wish for a defi- 
nition that shall not be abstract, but applicable to the case under conside- 
ration, viz. slavery as it exists at the present day in our own country. Let 
us go then to the slave lau-s and to fad^, to learn what slavery is, and then 
we will make out our definition. And let it be here observed, that in a 
country like ours, where the laws depend upon the will of the majority, and 
where elections are annual, it is a fair presumption that the laws express 
the decided sentiment of a majority of the people. And since the laws 
are sanctioned by the practice and silent consent of many of those who 
are said to be unfriendly to the system of slavery, but who make no ef- 
forts lo procure a change of these laws, we may conclude that not only a 
majority, but the great body of the people, are willing that they should 
remain as they are. The slave-laws, then, may be considered as con- 
taining the eoibodied sentiments of the nation in regard to slavery. Let 
us examine some of the provisions of these laws. 

In the first place, the laws of all the slave-holding states regard slaves, 
not as human beings, bvt us ihiiigs, or beasts ; not as the owners of ilitir 
onmbodies and souls, but as the propcrftj of their masters. One or two 
quotations will be sufficient to illustrate this point. The law of South Car- 
olina is as follows : " Slaves shall be deemed, sold, taken, reputed and 
adjudged, in law, to be chattels personal in the hands of their owners or 
possessors, and their executors, administrators and assigns, to all intents, 
constructions, and purposes whatsoever." According to the civil code of 
Louisiana, " A slave is one who is in the power of the master to whoui 
he belongs. The master may sell him, dispose of his person, his indus- 
try, and his labor; he can do noihing, possess nothing, nor acquire 
any thing, but what must belong to his master." 

Again, the slave is entirehj subject to the will of the master, and may be 
jmnishcd by him even with death. The laws in relation to the protection 
o( the life of the slave are so peculiar that they deserve especial consider 
ration. If we read only one clause of a statute, we should conclude that 
the protection of the slave is intended; but if we read on, we find some 
exception or provision which entirely nullifies the law, and leaves the 
slave at the mercy of the master or overseer. An act of North Carolina, 
passed in 179S, reads thus: ''Whereas by another act of assembly,, 
passed in the year 1774, the killing of a slave, however wanton, cruel and 

*These quotations from the slave laws, and most of those that follow, are 
t'lom " Stroud's Slave Laws," The references to this and to other authori- 
ties quoted in different parts of Jhe discourse, are for the sake of convenience 
•^njited. 



8 

deliberate, is orilypunished inthefirst instance by imprisonment and paying 
the value thereof to the owner, which distinction of criminality between the 
murder of a w hite person & one who is equally a human creature, but merely 
of a diflerent complexion, is disgraceful to humanity, and degrading in the 
highest degree to the laws and principles of a free, Christian and enlight- 
ened country. Be it enacted, &.C. Ihat if any person shall hereafier be 
guilty of will'ully and maliciously killing a slave, such offender shall, upon 
the lirst conviction thereof, be adjudged guilty of murder, and shall suffer 
the same punishment a^ if he had killed a free man ; Provided alwaijs, 
this act shall hol extend to the person hilling ashtve oiiiluived bij virtue ofimij 
act ofassetnblij oj this ^tate,or tetany slave in the actofresista.tce to his law fid 
owMr or master, or to any slave dying under moderate correction.''^ The 
law of Georgia is .substantially the same. INow when we take into con- 
.-ideration this law, and all the circumstances connected with it, it appears 
to be the very height of ciuelty. It allows the murder of an outlawed 
slave — and « hen is a slave an outlaw ? ''A proclamation of outlawry 
against a slave is authorised, whenever he runs away from his master, 
conceals hi.nself in some obscure retreat, and to sustain life, kills a hog, 
or some animal of the cattle kind !!" The meanmg of the clause wliich 
speaks of resistance may be known from a reported case, in which it has 
been "judicially determined that it is justifiable to kill a slave resisting or 
offering to resist his master by force." The absurdity of styling that 
correction ''moderate" which cause.- death, is too gross to need comment. 
Hero then is a law, which, while it speaks of its being "disgraceful to 
humanity" to abuse a slave because he nas a " different complexion," di- 
rectly alter gives license to murder him whenever the slave affersio resist, 
or whenever the master oroverseerchuosestoresoitto moc/cra/ecorrection. 

But there is anothsr law common to all the slave States, which effectu- 
ally excludes the slave (rom the protection of law and leaves him at the 
mercy, not of the master merely, but of all othei white men. I refer to 
the law which excludes the colored man from giving testimony againat 
the white man. Any white man can abuse or kill any number ot 
slaves or free colored men, and provided no while man is [Jiesent as a 
w'itnes.-j, he cannot be convicted. This law exposes the whole colored 
race to the abuse of any and of every white man, and particularly of that 
class of men whom Mr. Wirt styles the "last and lovvest,a/ef«/«?n of beings, 
called overseers the most abject,degraded, unprincipled race — always cap 
in hand to the dons who employ them, and turnishin;: materialsfor the ex 
crcise of their pride, insolence, and spirit of domination." 

Again, the slave laws are such as almost entirely to destroy the institution 
of marriage, aid to produce general licentiousness. I quote as [)roof the 
testimony of the Hev. Mr. Paxton, a friend of the Colonization Society, 
and formerly a slave-holder : " Some slaves have indeed a mairiaga cer- 
emony performed. It is however usually done by one of their own color, 
and of course is not a legal transaction. And if done by a person le- 
gally authorised to perform marriages, still it would have no auihority, be- 
ravse the law does not recognise marriage among slaves^ so as to clothe it 
with the rights and immunities which it has among citizens. The owner of 
(Mther party might the next day or hour break up the connection, in any 
wavho pleased. In fact, these connections have no protection, and are 



9 

so often broken up by sales and transfers and removals, that they are by 
the slaves often called taking zip together. The sense of marriage fideli- 
ty must be greatly weakened, if not wholly destroyed, by vsuch a state of 
things. The effect is most disastrous." Mr. Paxton then goes on to 
give the details of this disastrous effect, both upon the slaves and upon 
the white population ; but I will not give you pain by presenting the dis- 
gusting picture. A system better fitted to produce licentiousness could 
not be devised, than the slave system. 

Attain, the slave Imus forbid the teaching of slaves to read or write, and 
I hvs preclude their instruction in the Scriptures. Laws against the in- 
struction of slaves were enacted as early as 1740, and these laws have 
been growing more and more severe ever since. The revised cede of 
Virginia contains an enactment which declares that " any school or 
schools for teaching them, [i. e. all negroes, or mulattoes, whether bond 
or free] reading or writing, either in the day or night, under whatsoever 
pretext, shall be deemed and considered an unlawiul assembly." In 
North Carolina, '' to teach a slave to read or write, or to sell or give him 
any book or pamphlet, is punished with sixty-nine lashes, or with impris- 
onment at the discretion of the court, if the offender be a free negro ; 
and with a line of two hundred dollars, if a white." The reason set 
forth in this law is, that " teaching slaves to read and write tends to excite 
dissatisfaction in their minds, and to produce insurrection and rebellion." 
The laws of the other slave states are similar. In Louisiana, an act has 
been passed within a few years of more than ordinary severity. The 
words of the statute are as follows : '■ If any person in Louisiana, from 
the bar, bench, stage, pulpit, or any other place, or in conversation, shall 
make use of any language, signs or actions, having a tendency to pro- 
duce discontent among the free colored people, or insubordination among 
the slaves, such person shall be punished with imprisonment from three to 
twentv-one years, or with death at the discretion of the court." Accord- 
ing to this law, the reading of the 5Sth chapter of Isaiah, when any col- 
ored person should be present, would be punishable with death ; for sure- 
ly that chapter would have a tendency ioproduce discontent iij the minds of 
the oppressed. 

I might go on quoting these oppressive laws for hours, but your patience 
must not be abused. After what I consider a faithful examination of this 
part of the subject, I have come to the conclusion that the laws afford no 
protection to the slave that is worth naming ; and not only so, they re- 
quire the slave-holder to be an oppressor, and consequently to break the 
laws of God. According to law, the slave can have no p}'oper/i/,|no ivifc, 
no children, no Bible. And what is this but making a man a heathen by 
statute? Forbid a man to hold property, and you make him a thief. Take 
away his wife and children and break up the marriage institution, and you 
make him licentious. Withhold from him the Bible, and you complete 
the whole work of degradation, and he is altogether a heathen. 

We have thus seen what slavery is, according to law, and have said that 
if the laws were obeyed, they would make the slaves heathen. Let us 
now see whether they are not heathen in fact. On this point I will pre- 
sent some extracts from an essay prepared during the last year, under the 
direction of the Presbytery of Georgia, by the Rev. C. C. Jones, of 



10 

Liberty county. Mr. Jcnes, having under his pastoral charge six thou- 
sand slaves, has taken special pains to investigate their moral and religious 
condition ; and this fact, in connection with the excellence of his charac- 
ter, gives to his testimony great weight. In reply to the question, '• Has 
the negro access to the Scriptures ?" he says, " The statutes of our re- 
spective states forbid it, or when through some oversight Ihey do not, cus- 
tom does. On the one hand he cannot be a hearer of the law, for oral 
instruction is but sparingly afforded him ; and on the other hand he can- 
not search the Scriptures, for a knowledge of letters he has not, and can- 
not legally obtain." In regard to this oral instruction, of which Mr. 
Jones speaks, and of which our Southern brethren generally are begin- 
ning to speak, let it here be remarked, that it will not d<> to shut out the 
IJible from the slave. What is the great sin of the Romish church? It is 
that she will not give the Bible to the common people. This was the 
grand error which Luther exposed. And now, in this day of light, when 
we have voted that we will give the Bible to the v/hole world, shall w-e 
withhold it from our own countrymen, and pretend that ;hey do not need 
it? Let us hear Mr. Jones farther : " It is a solemn fact which we must 
not conceal, that their private and public religious instruction forms no 
part of the aim of owners generally. There is no anxiety, no effort 
made to obtain such instruction. The great, the absorbing aim is, to work 
them profitably. They are shut out from our sympathies and efforts as im- 
mortal beings, and are educated and disciplined as creatures of profit, and 
of profit only, for this world." We sometimes hear it said, that large 
numbers of slaves are members of churches, and it is true that manv of 
them do belong to the church ; but on this point Mr. Jones observes, " the 
number of professors of religion [among the slaves] is small, that can 
present a correct view of the plan of salvation. True religion they are 
greatly inclined to place in profession, in forms, in ordinances; and true 
conversion in dreams, visions, trances, and voices; and these they offer 
to church sessions as evidences of conversion. Sometimes principles of 
conduct are adopted by church members, at so much variance with the 
gospel, that the grace of God is turned into laciviousness. No man 
knows the extent of their ignorance on the subject of religion, until he 
foi himself makes special investigation. They believe in second sight, 
in apparitions, in charms, in witchcraft, in a kind of irresistible Satanic in- 
tiuence. The superstitions that were brought with them from Africa, 
have never fully been laid aside." In regard to the great mass who make 
no pretensions to religion, Mr. Jones says that their notions of God and 
of a future state are confused, and that "some are ignorant of the name 
itself of the exalted Saviour. 'J'he Mohammedan Africans who remain 
of the old stock of importation'^, though accustomed to hear the gospel 
preached, have been known to accommodate Christianity to Mohamme- 
danism, God, say they, is Allah, and Jesus Christ is Mohammed ; the 
religion is the same, but different countries have different names." 

Mr. Jones gives a dark picture of the vices of slaves. Polygamy is com- 
mon among them. '' Little or no sacredness is attached to the marriage 
contract. It is viewed as a contract of convenience, that may be entered 
into and dissolved at any time. They generally unite without ceremony, 
Nothing is more common than the dissolution of marriage ties j and in- 



11 

■stances of conjugal fidelity for a long course of years are exceedingly rare 
Chastity in either sex is an exceedingly rare virtue. Such is the univer- 
sality and greatness of the vice of lewdness, that t those who are acquaint- 
ed with slave countries, not a word need be said. All the consequences 
of thin vice are to be seen, not excepting infanticide itself." We further 
learn from the statements of Mr. Jones, that the slaves are proverbially 
thieves, that their word cannot be depended upon at all, and that the) 
break the Sabbath almost universally, giving as an excuse, that they have- 
no other time to work for themselves. 

The Rev Mr. Converse, of Burlington, Vermont, who was at one pe- 
riod an agent of the Colonization Society, and resided for some time in 
Virginia, states in a discouse before the Vermont Colonization Society, 
that " almost nothing is done to instruct the slaves in the principles and 
duties of the Christian religion. The laws of the South strictly forbid 
thier being taught to read ; and they make no provision for their being 
orally instructed. Ministers sometimes preach to them under peculiar and 
severe restiictions of the law. But with all that has yet been done, the 
majority are emphatically heathen, and what is very strange, heathens in 
the midst of a land of Sabbaths, and of churches, of Bibles, and ot 
Christians. . . . Pious masters (with some honorable exceptions) 
are criminally negligent of giving religious instruction to their slaves. It 
has long been neglected, and masters have fallen into a deep sleep in re- 
ference to this matter. They can and do instruct their own children, and 
perhaps their house servants ; while those called ' field hands' live and 
labor, and die without being once told by their pious masters that Jesus 
died to save sinners. Indeed, this is a most ungrateful task to tlie mas- 
ter. He is so much accustomed to speak to them in the rough tone of 
sternness and authority, that it requires an effort most revolting to his 
feelings, to assume the kind and gentle accents of a Christian teacher." 

A writer in tiie Western liUminary, a respectable religious paper in 
Lexington, Kentucky, says, " I proclaim it abroad to the Christian world 
that heathenism is as real in the slave states as it is in the South Sea Is- 
lands, and that our negroes are justly objects of attention to the American 
and other boards of foreign missions, as the Indians of the Western wilds. 
W^hat is it constitues heathenism ? Is it to be destitute of a knowledge of 
God — of his holy word - never to have heard scarcely a sentence of it 
read through life — to know little or nothing of the history, character, in- 
struction and mission of Jesus Christ — to be almost totally devoid ot' 
moral knowledge and feeling, of sentiments of probity, truth and chasti- 
ty? If this constitutes heathenism, then are there thousands, millions of 
heathen in uur own beloved land. There is one topic to which I wiH 
allude, which will serve to establish the heathenism of this population. I 
allude to the universal licentiousness which prevails. It may be said em- 
phatically that cha-;tity is no virtue among them — that its violation neither 
injures female character in their own estimation, or that of their master or 
mistress. No instruction is ever given — no censure pronounced. I 
speak not of the world ; I speak of Christian families generally." 

Much more testimony of this kind might be adduced ; but this is suffi- 
<".ient to establish the point that most of the slaves are as truly ignorant ol' 
Hie Christian religion as the heathen. We are now in some measure pre 



12 

pared for a definition of slavery. And lest my own language should aj*- 
pear too strong, I will first make use of a definition which I find in the 
African Repository, from the pen of the Rev. J. Breckenridge, of Balti- 
more. I shall quote the passage entire, just as it stands, with the excep- 
tion of substituting the word heathenism for a clause of a sentence which 
speaks of ignorance and the evils which proceed from it: "What is 
slavery 1" says 3Ir. B. '' We reply, it is that condition enforced by the 
laws of one half the States of this confederacy, in which one portion of 
the community, called masters, is allowed such power over another por- 
tion, called slaves, as 1st, To deprive them of the entire earnings of their 
labor, except only so much as is necessary to continue laboritself, by con- 
tinuing healthful existence, thus committing clear robbery — 2d, To reduce 
them to the necessity of universal concubinage, by denying to them the 
rights of marriage ; thus breakmg up the dearest relations of life, and en- 
couraging universal prostitution — 3d, To deprive them of the means and 
opportunities of moral and intellectual culture, thus perpetuating heathen- 
ism — 4th, To set up between parents and their children an authority 
higher than the impulse of nature and the laws of God ; which breaks up 
the authority of the father over his own offspring, and at pleasure sep- 
arates the mother at a returnless distance from her child ; thus abrogating 
the dearest laws of nature ; thus outraging all decency and justice, and 
degrading and oppressing thousands upon thousands of beings created 
like themselves, in the image of the Most High God. This is slavery, as 
it is daily exhibited in every slave state." 

To put this definition into my own language, it would stand thus : — 
Slavery is a system which, 1. Claims the right ofpropertij in man ; 2. De- 
stroys the marriage contract among slaves ; 3. Shuts the Bible from them ; 
4. Encourages and sustains the domestic slave-trade. That this definition 
of slavery is authorised by the references we have made to the slave laws, 
and by the testimony adduced respecting the actual condition of the slaves, 
we presume all will admit. Slavery, then, is morally wrong, and every 
one who holds his fellow man in such slavery as this, is a sinner. And 
now comes the unavoidable inference, that immediately to repent of this 
sin is a duty, or in othi^r words, immediate emancipation is a duty. But 
from this position many of our countrymen start back. Let us then ex- 
amine it. Take one of the points of our definition. Is it right to buy and 
sell men as merchandise or beasts ? Is it right to set up between parents and 
children an authority higher than that of the parent and the laws of God,^ 
and thus separate children from their mothers? Would it be proper to cease 
from tearing mothers from their children, and wives from their husbands, 
graduallyl Ought not all laws which sanction and encourage such bar- 
barity to be repealed immediately 1 i. e. at the very next session of each 
State Legislature, for this is what the word immediately means as applied 
to legislative acts. Ought not every slave-holder to cease from this day 
all acts which tear families asunder 1 In other words, ought not the do- 
mestic slave-trade, in these United States, to cease at once? It is compu- 
ted by a friend of the Colonization Society, in »n appendix to Clarksoti's 
History of the Abolition of the slave-trade, that more than 60,000 slaves 
are " annually bought and sold, and involuntarily transferred from one 
part to another of this free and happy country." The American Qnar- 



13 

•Oily Review states that 0,000 are sold and tiansporled aiuiualiy (toiu 
Virginia alone, to the South and Southwest. I» this right? Ought it nor 
to cease immediately? Shall we talk about the 'gradual abolition of such 
things as these? Mr. Benton, an agent of the American Sunday School 
Union in Missouri, says, that while prosecuting his agency, '' he was ap- 
plied to in more than a hundred instances by slaves who were about to be 
sold to Southern drivers, beseeching nim in the most earnest manner to 
buy them, so that they might not be driven away tiom their wives, theii 
chidren, their brothers and their sisters. Knowing that his feelings were 
abhorrent to slavery, they addressed him without reserve, and with an'en- 
treaty bordermg on fienzy." "Curiosity,'' writes a gentleman in Charles- 
ion, to his friend in xMew York, " sometimes leads me to the auction sales 
of the negroes. A few days since I attended one. The bodies of these 
wretched beings were placed upright upon a table — (heir physical propor- 
tions examined — their defects and beauties noted ! There I saw ihofathcr- 
loviking with sullen contempt on the crowd, and expressing an indignation 
in his counte'.iance which he dare not speak ; and the mother, pressing 
her infents closer to her bosotn with an involuntary grasp, and exclaiming 
in wild and simple earnestness, while tiie tears chased down her cheeks 
in quick succession, ' leant feff mij chrldrea — / ivuni Icff mij children ! !' 
Ikit on the hammar went, reckless alike whether it united or sundered for- 
ever. At another time (1)3 proceeds) I saw the concluding scene oi' 
this in%nal.lii«;iia. It was on the wharf. 'A slave ship for New Orleans 
vv-as lying in the stream, and the poor negroes, handcuffed and pinioned, 
were hurried off in boats, eight at a time. There I witnessed the last - 
farewell — the heart-rending separation of every earthly lic^ — the mute and 
agonizing embrace of the husband and wife, and the convulsive grasp 
of the mother and child, who were alike torn asunder forever. It was a 
living death — they never see or hear of each other more. Tears flowed 
fast, and mine among the rest." Now we ask again, ought this buying 
and selling of human beings to contmue another day ? You must agree with 
me in saying, no. But you will ask, what can we do ? We cannot immedi- 
ately stop it ; and why therefore talk about immediate abolition ? I answer 
that we can urge immediate duty upon these buyers and sellers, until they 
stop sinning, and that is the only way to stop them. The question be- 
tbre us is, What is duty? What is right? And if you are a Christian, or if 
voii have a common humanity, you must admit that it is wicked to tear 
asunder families, and to treat human beings hke cattle. You mu^t ad- 
mit that all persons who practice such cruelty ought immediately to stop. 
Sofu'-, then, you are an immediale aholilionist. 

Take now another point of our definition. Is it right to deprive slaves 
of the means of moral and intellectual culture — to withhold from them the 
Rible, and thus to make them heathen? When I think of thi,^ feature of 
slavery, and of the indifference with which even good men treat this part 
of the subject, I know not what to say. I have no words that can express 
my feelings. Here we are, talking about the converson of the world — 
the whole world — expressing our sympathy for every form of heathenism 
— sending out our missionaries to explore every kiny dom and province of 
the empire of darkness — and at the same time, by the laws which we en> 
act, and by the public sentiment which we cherish, we are making our own 

B 



\ J 



14 

i:ounti'ij)neii hcuthcn. Thus with one hand we tue destio) uig healhcnibn;, 
and with ihe other -ve are creatuig it. We hear that the Flat-head Indi- 
ans heyond the Rocky Mountains want Missionaries, and immediately the 
whole church is awake, and cries, Send them the men. We ht ar of a 
tribe oi' savages in Eastern Africa, called Zoulahs, by whom it is thought 
Missionaries will be received, and at once five men are appointed to that 
station. Bi|t we hear of two millions in our vnn counlnj, the most of 
whom ar(^ virtually heathen, and tiie church sa}', Be silent! be profoundly 
silent!! But, say our opposers, the slaves are permitted to receive oro/ 
iustructimi, and the nation is now waking up to the importance of giving 
thoin oral instruction.* This is the very climax of inconsistency. Go 
read the ^(i;^sionary lit raid. Hear what missionaries in headien lands 
say aboui the necessity of e-tabhshing schools and educatingthe children, 
becau-e the adults arc so confirmed in vice and degradation, mental and 
moral, that they arc almost beyond h(jpe. See how much time the} 
spend in iran.'-hitingthe Bible and writing tracts. See them making prepa- 
rations to convert the whole empire of China, chiefly by means of the 
Bible and olher religious books! Why all this? Because a knowledge of 
letters must accontpany, and in some cases go before oral instruction, in 
order to rai.-e up the mind from heathenism. Oral instruction is good, 
peculiarly good, in jts place ; but it will be coniparaiively powerless alone. 
And yet there are Christians, who make i^reat speeches about the impor- 
tance of Bible societies, and Sunday schools, and Tract societies, and 
Education societies, who think that oral instruction for slaves will on the 
whole do very well; and that it would be wrong to disturb the prejudices of 
slave-holders, by insisting upon any thing more at present. V\ hat a 
world of inconsistency, and error, and prejudice, there is in the minds of 
many good men on this subject ! We boast that we are the most enlight- 
ened and religious nation on the globe — wc talk laigely about our com- 
mon schools, and the intelligence of the lower classes — we proclaim to 
the world that we have given every family in the nation a Bible,and that we 
are establishing Sabbath schools in every spot in our country where there 
are enough human beings to form a school, — we boast of all these things, 
while at the wame time we strangely pretend that the slaves, whose intel- 
lects are the most obtuse, and therefore need the greatest amount of in- 
struction, can get along very well with oral instruction alone ! If this is not 
makina void the law of God, 1 know not what is. 

My heart bleeds when I hear Christians talking thus about oral instruc- 
tion ; and I tremble for my countrv, when I see her going systematically 
to work, as she has done, to keep a v/hole race of men in the lowest de- 
gradation — when I see her making laws that shut out men from heaven — 
when I see her shuttmg up the soul of man, and trampling upon the im- 

*[t is staled by those who heiieve that oral insiruction is all that the slaves 
in presen: cirournstancPs ouifhi to receive, that in some Sabbath ^chools for 
slave?, the children acquire as nuirh knowle(li;;e of the Bible as white 
children who can read. Tiiis only proves that we ar" under ;u't"«//(7r obli- 
gations to cultivate in every possible way minds thai are so easily instructed. 
There mii<t be now and tlien a Tuussatnt Louverture among such children. 
Great mu^t be the ;in of keejiiuy back the knowledge of letters from such 
minds. 



15 

age of God there. " Wo for those that trample on a luind I a deathless 
thuig ! They know not ^vhat they do. Man, pei chance, may li(>;ht anew 
the torch he quenches ; but for the soul ! O tremble and beware nut to lay 
rude hands upon God's image there." I tremble for my country, when 1 
think of that vitiated public sentiment pervadmg the South and the North, 
which can toleiate such high-handed wickedness, and can even denounce 
the men who amid obloquy and persecution are domg what they can to 
show the peo.de their sins. Shalll not visil for these things? suitli the 
Lord, ^hall not ni>j soul be avenged on svch a naiion as this ? A wonder, 
fid and horrible thing is committed ^n the land : the prophets p' ophesij false- 
hj, and my people tovt to have it so. 

My friends, I wish you to make up your minds in regard to this point. 
Is it right to shut out the slave from the Bible ? Ought not this pait of the 
slave system to cease at once 1 Ought not every slave-holder to bet; in to- 
day to teach his servants to read the Scriptures ■? Do you say that the 
laws forbid it ? What of that'? Suppose the laws should i'orbid you to 
teach your own children to read the Bible. Suppose ihey should forbid 
you to pray, as Nebuchadnezzar did in the case of Daniel - or to take a 
case exactly in point, suppose the laws should forbid you to propagate the 
Christian religion, as the rulers of the Jews did in the case ot Peter and 
John. Would you obey such laws l What did the apo^tles do? Did not 
we straithj command you, (^aid the rulers) that ye shonld not teach in his 
name ? and hehold ye have filled Jerusal m wtth your doctrine, and intend 
fo bring this man^s blood upon us. This language is just that of our 
country, which says to the abolitionist who comes with the Bible in his 
hand, you will produce "insurrection, and bring blood upon us. But hear 
the answer of the apostles . Then Peter and the other apostles ancicered 
and said, xve ought to obey God rather than mn. So say we. We are 
not bound to obey laws which are contrary to the laws of God. We arc 
5o?««fZ to teach men to search the Scriptures, though all the powers of 
earth forbid. What Chiisiian does not know that he is bound fo obey 
God rather than men, and to break any and all human laws rather than 
violate conscience? And yet I have been gravely told by men whom ! 
very much love and respect, by men of high intelligence and piety, that 
this is the very principle ot nullification. 'I hey have reminded me of that 
passage of St. Paul, Let evry soiU be subject unto the higher pcxvers. — 
True, the powers that be. are ot God; and equally true is it, the powers 
that be not, are not of God. God never authorises man to legislate in 
opposition to his leg'slalion. But it is asked, are we never bound to submit 
to unjust laws ? Yes, when we can submit and not break any law of God. 
But when the laws require us to commit any sin, or to neglect any duty, 
then We are bound to break such laws. This is the doctrine of the Bible, 
and has been the practice of God's people in all ages. We cnn refer to 
instances without number. There is the case of Daniel, already referred to 
— the case of Hannaniah, otherwise called Shadrach, and his two com- 
panions — the case of the apostles, in several instances — and the case of 
the primitive Christians, who refused to bear arms, and who in thousands 
of instances died martyrs, because they refused to say one word that 
should be disrespectful to their Divine Master. There is the case also ot 
the Waldensps and Albigenses, who were inhumanly massacred because 



16 

'licy '.vould not comply wiiii the unchristian demands of the church of 
ilome, one of the most obnoxious of which demands was, as in the very 
vatJe under consideration, thai the Scriptures be kept from the hands oJi}u 
oininon people. I might speak hkewise of the Huguenots of France, 
;he Puritauo of England, the Covenanters of Scotland who were perse- 
^uted and killed because they obeyed God rather than man. I will allud< 
■V) one more instance only. A short time !?ince the Secretaries of the A- 
niericau Board, in delivering their instructions to Mr. Parker, who wah 
about to sail tor China as a missionary, gave him amooii other directions 
the followmg: " if he [the missionary] finds a people willing to receive 
iiim, he is to persevere in publishing to them the message uf salvation, 
fhough laws and magistrates forbid, and even at the expense of liberty 
■ind life. He is not indeed to coUrt persecution ; but a people willing U> 
receive the gospel are not to be abandoned, though all the enaclmenrs 
and power of their rulers are arrayed against their instruction." It is hu- 
miliating to be obliged to argue this point — to be obliged to prove, in the 
vear 1834, that we are bound to obey God raiher than man — a doctrine 
'.veil unuerstood and acted upon as far back at least as the days of Moses, 
vho owed his life to the fact that his parents understood this doctrine and 
carried it out in practice.^ I do think that abolitionists have a right to com-, 
plain, when they are bitterly reproached, as they have been throughout the 
land, for teaching the plain doctrine of the Bible, that we are not bound 
to obey laws that are contrary to the laws of God. 

V^'o come back now to the question, Is it right to withhoM instruction froro. 
the slave, another day? Ought not the slave-holder to commence at once 
the instruction of his servants, or at least to permit others to do it? Is it 
right to koep them in heathenism any longer ? Is it right to persist anoth- 
er moment in the awful crime of trampling upon the soul — of putting out 
the candle of the Jjord in the immortal mind ? I believe you will all agree 
with mo on this point You will admit that the slaves ought to receive 
something besides oral instruction, and that all the laws which forbid it are 
'vicked and ought to be repealed. On this point also, then, you are an 
immediate abolitionist. 

Call me not severe, when I say that such laws are v.icked, and that the 
making and executing of such laws is a horrid crime. Language does 
not furnish words sufficiently strong to indicate the dreadfulness of this 
•rime. Murder is considered the worst of crimes; but that is a crime 
against the body — this is }»erpetiated against the soul. It is the murder 
jf the immortal spirit. It is making men beasts, in order that they may be 
more safely and ( rofitably worked. It is shutting them out from instruc- 
lion, for ftar that thev vvill learn they are men, and refuse tobetrealed as 
■attic. It is endeavoring to put out from the body that soul which God 
lias put into it, because it is dangerous to abuse the body so long as it is 
inhabhod by a soul that is conscious of its high origin and its eternal des- 
tiny. And when we see all this done by high-minded, intelligent. Christ- 
ian men — when we see it done systematically, by law — when we see i< 
done with cool, calculating tenacity of purpose, year after year, and gen- 
eration after generation — when we see it done in the blazing light of such 
an age as this, at a time when all the world is crying out against 
?uch ihinj''', — where shall we find laniiuage to describe this crime? Tc 



17 

\all it theft, or robbery, is tarne. If a man steals my cloak, I call him a 
thief; but what shall I call the man who steals my body, and then puts out 
tny soul, in orderthathe may retain the stolen property unmolested 1 I have 
dwelt particularly on this point, because it is a shockmg lieuture in our 
slave system. We hear it said every day that the slaves are well treated; 
and what do men mean by this? Why that their bodies are well treaied. 
And so we treat our horses and oxen well. Indeed, horses and oxen are 
treated better than the slaves gi nerally are. Let a man be seen flogging 
his horse as cruelly as the slaves are flogged un some of the plantations, 
and he would cease to be respectable. But suppose the facts were other- 
wise. Suppose the slaves were all treated as kindly as horsss usually 
are. Suppose them as contented and happy as they are said lo be. Ad- 
mit that they can laugh and sing amid their chains, and ridicule the idea of 
freedom. .What does this prove? Do you not see that it furnishes us 
with the most powerful of all arguments against the whole system ? Do 
you not see that when you have shown that the slave tan dance and make 
merry in his degradation, that you have proved him to be little else than 
a brute? Slavery has quenched the light of the soul — it has well nigh ex- 
pelled the glorious spirit from the body — it has transformed the human be- 
ing into an upright beast, — and this you call kind treatment. Because 
'the heaven-born soul is brought so low, that it i.s contented with the very 
dust, and degradation, and pollution in which it grovels, you conclude 
that the slave is happy and well treated. Strange, that good men, intelli- 
gent men, should talk about the kind treatment of slaves, when the very 
facts which they adduce in proof are the strongest proof of their inhuman 
treatment. Suppose your own children and brothers and sisters were 
shut out from all knowledge, and reduced almost to the condition of cat- 
tle, so that they should be incapable of any enjoyment except animal en- 
joyment ; and suppose that they were contented and merry in their bru- 
tish condition ; suppose farther they had become so debased as almost to 
lose the desire of freedom — would you, because they happened to have 
food enough to kee|) them from starving, and clothing enough to cover 
their nakedness, call this kind treatment ? If the persons who thus treat- 
ed your children and kindred should call themselves humane and kind, 
what would you say ? You would exclaim, out upon such humanity! it is 
the worst of inhumanity. Away with such kindness I it is of all cruelty 
the most shocking. The nearer you come to proving that the slave is con- 
tented and happy in his degradation, the nearer you come to proving by 
the same argument that the slave is a brute in intellect, and that his oppress- 
or is cruel to the soul, although he may be kind to the body. I hope that 
reasonable men will give up this argument, and cease to make the thread- 
bare and false assertion that the slaves are well treated ; for, be it known, 
it is not kind treatment first to imbrute a man by extinguishing his mind, 
and then to feed him well as you do a horse. 

Look now to another point of our definition. In the two positions al- 
ready noticed, I believe the audience have agreed with me. Let us see 
if we can still go on together. Is it right to break up the marriage insti- 
tution among slaves, and make them beasts in this respect, as well as in 
many others? Is it right to encourage, in the words of Mr. Breckenridge, 
''universal prostitution?" I will not insult this audience by reasoning one 

b2 



^ • 18 

ujotncnl oii Ihi:' poinU There can be but one opinioti — you will all ^^.^v 
that tliis part of the system ought imuiediately to cease, O/i thispoint, 
fhsn, you are an immediate abohtionist. 

There is one point more to be considered. Is it right to deprive men 
'» of ihe entire caniings of their labor, except only so much as is necessa- 
ry to continue labor, thus committing clear robbery i" Is it right thus to 
hold pn^perty in man 1 Perhaps, you will say that holding property in niaii 
ij not r.rccs.^arily robbery, and that ii may m seme in.--tiinces be allowa- 
ble. At least, you think it unju^-i to break up at once this right of proper- 
ty in slaves, because the laws ha\e hiiheito recognised this right, and 
thus en: ouiaged the owners or their ancestersto uivcsttheir capital in this 
way ; aad now the owners are entitled to protection, ou the same princi- 
ple tliat manufacturers are. Thus you adopt the fundamental principle ot 
slavery, that a man ia not a man, but a lliing or a beusl ; and that conse- 
quently the sudden repeal of the slave laws and the sudden repeal of the 
lurilF wouli! be equally unjust. 

When w ill (nen learn the first principles of moral tri.th? What can be 
moie plain, than that the laws cannot gi\e to one class of men the right to 
own the bodies and minds of another class of men! What proposition is 
self-evident, if not this one, that t\ery man ouns lihns''IJ f And yet our 
countrymen, all over the land, talk about the injustice of abolition. They 
call it infringing upon the property and rights of the slave-holder. He 
has i'lhtuted, they say, this sfiecies of property, and he cannot equitably 
be deprived of it.* I know not how to reason with those who thusccm- 

*Dues jujustice, by descending from father to son for two orthree genera- 
tions, become justice? The diflerence between the present generation and 
the first generation of slave-holders is this, the one commenced & system ol 
wrong, and the other continues it. It is very much like the case of Adam 
ami his posieiiiy. If we charge the whole guih ol" slavery upon a former 
geneiation, ou the same principle we should make the first parents of our 
race accouniable for ail tiie sin that has since been committed. Supj)ose 
that your lather had built his house upon the grounds of another man, and 
thaiai hisdeaUi he had bequeathed the property thus unjustly seized upon 
to you, and that tiiLs is all you Juive — Is thai [iroperty now yours ? No. The 
title is in another man and he can claim the estate. If, then, you cannot 
inherit land unjustly seized upon, how can von inherit a whole human be- 
iijg? W'hai is your tile to his body and mind, received from your father, 
worth, compared with the hiirher title to his entire self which the man has 
received from the Fathet of Jill ? Suppose that an Irish landlord has an es- 
tnte which is fanned out to a hundred tenants, from each of whom he rx- 
acis double 'he rent which they can afford to pay, so that they are obliged to 
live in abject wretchedness. He dies and leaves the estate to his hcir.-^ 
Will that heir he justifit'd in oppressing his tenan's on the grounds hat his 
father di I so neforc him? Certainly not. By Vvha' principle of right then, 
can the siave■hold^'^ withhold from another hundred human beings not ouly 
aii properi\, but what is far dearer, liberty? 

One illustration -nore.— Suppose that a planter in Virginia dies to-daj 
and.bequoaihes to me one husilred slaves. — Tids places me in the condition 
of every young slave holder when he comes of age. What mu<t I do ? 
Thf laws fcbid emancipation. What can I do? Show me some "'/)/«?z.'"' 
Thi.s is precisely the difficulty of our Southern brethren who wish to get 
rid of slavery. In such a case I should perhaps consider myself bound to 



19 

Knit outrage upon first principles. If men will contend that the slave- 
holder has property in his slavet<, thai the black man does not belong to 
himself, we shall not condescend to reason with them. Here is a 
man standing upon the necks oi' one hundred of his fellow-beings, and 
he says I am worth fifty thousand dollars. Another man standing by says to 
the abolitionist, you must not push him otf by law, or by public sentiment, 
or even make him wilhng to get ofi' himseif, because you will destroy his 
[)roperty — property which he has inherited, and make him a ^ oor man. — 
Shall we reason with such people? The men who hold such dreadful 
principles may the next moment, for aught we know, plant themselves 
upon our necks, and proceed to tell how much theu are worth. They and 

l)p the masier of the slaves in the eye of the law, until I coulil gel them 
away from the law or the hiw away from them, but 1 would ciisniiss the 
yveiseer, and say to them. 'I will consider you as hired laborers and give 
you wages. 1 will never sell you. I will gi'-e you the Bible and teach you 
io "senrc/i" it; and I will use nil my influence to procure a change of the 
laws so tliat you can be free in form as well as in fact ; or i!" you choose to 
go to the free Siates, or to Liberia, or to go abroad here as freemen, you are 
at liberty to do as you piease." 

Connected wiih this argu'iienl which attempts to df^fend slave-holding on 
the ground of right and justice, there is another \v!iich proceeds upon the 
ground of expediency. It is said that the slave would be injured by eman- 
cipation, and iha' coaseqently he should be firsl prepared for freedom. To 
this argument, these remarks may be made in reply. First.— It is not right 
to enclave men in order to make them happy. One of the arguments used 
111 support of the slave-trade was, that it was better for the negroes to be re- 
moved from the crueiies and superstitions of Africa, to a country where 
they might he christianized. The fallacy of this argument is now admit- 
ted, so far as it respec:s the slave-trade. It is conceded that men are not 
to be taken from Africa and made slaves, even for he good of their souls. 
If, then, we may noxcommence a system of wrong, in order to make men 
more happy, neither can we be justified in coniinuing iliat system after it 
has been commenced. Secondly. — There is no evidence that the slave 
would be injured by freedom, for it would be almost impossible to make bis 
condition worse ilian it is. As a mere aniivcd, his situation might be more 
intolerable— but as a moral and intellectual being, 1 know not how his con- 
dition could be made worse. Tliirdlv. — The slave cawio/ be elevated and 
prepared for liberty, to any considerable eXient, while in btjndage. He does 
not feel the power of the motives to inip'ovement wliich act upon the free- 
man. You cannot elevate him, because, while you raise him with one band, 
with the other you hold bira down. You must allow him to siand fonh 
with the responsibilities of a man and choose for himself, — you rnus' treat 
him as ihe Oveator treats all his children, to wii, as a moral agent, before 
you can produce in him character and principle. " Many poliiicinns of our 
time," says Thomas Babington McAuley in the Edinburgh Review, " are in 
liie habit of laying it down as a self-evident proposition, that no people 
ought to be free, 'ill they are fit to use their freedom. The maxim is wor- 
thy the fool in the old story, wiio resolved not to go into the water until he 
had learned to swim. If men are to wait for liberty till they become wise 
and good in slavery, the" may indeed wait forever." This remark was in 
reference to po/iZicai slavery, — its application is still stronger in the case 
before us. It is true of nations, and especially irue of individuals, that. they 
(must learn to govern themselves by experience. The first pteptowards*^im- 
Vpioying and elevating them, is to strike off their chains. 



20 

their shocking principles are to be driven by the searching eye of religion.. 
and by the great voice of public sentiment, from decent society. If any 
have adopted, ignoianily, without examination, the principle that man maj 
hold property m man, we would deal tenderly with such, provided they 
will at once examine and abandon the principle. But if they will still 
hold on upon it, we can only leave theni to that awful storm of public 
indignation, now beginning to rise in its might, to sweep such principles 
from the nation and from the earth. 

I have now gone through with the exposition of our fundamental prin- 
ciples. They aie in as kw words as these: 1. It is sinful to withhold 
the Bible froni slaves, and it ought to be given them immediately. 2. It 
is sinful to destroy the marriage mstitution among slaves, and the slave- 
holder ought immediately to cease from all acts which have this tendency. 
3. It is sinful lo engage in or to be accessary to the domestic slave-trade, 
and this trade ought to be at once abolished. 4. It i.-. sinful to claim or 
exercise the right of pro[ierty in man, and this principle, which is the /wn- 
ddmenfal principle of slavery, ought at once to be given up. 

When men talk oC o^radual abolition, they forget what slavery is. They 
have before their minds a certain form of civil society, which they acknowl- 
edge to be very bad, but forget that there are certain things in the system 
which are directly contrary to the law of God, and which consequentl) 
must not be tolerated for a moment. They forget that slavery is a trans- 
gression of all the laws in the decalogue, and that therefore to urge im- 
mediate emancipation is simply to urge immediate obedience to the ten 
commandments. The difference between gradual and immediate abolition- 
ists is this : The advocates of gradual abolition look at the whole system 
as a subject for political action only. Immediate, abolitionists look at it as 
a moral question. The former are like the politicians who would leave 
heathenism to be gradually undermined by iheindirect undsilent influences 
of Christianity, but who have but little confidence in the plan now propo- 
sed by evangelical Christians. The latter are like the missionaries, who 
attack heathenism directly — who go to individuals and to communities, 
and say to them, you ought immediately to repent of idolatry. The work 
of convincing men that they are in the wrong, and of leading them to re- 
pentance, is of course in this sinful world always gradual; but then the 
doctrine, and the only doctrine, by which the gradual change can be brought 
about, is that of immediate repentance. Preach to the heathen the doc- 
trine of gradual repentance, and when will they repent ? Wever. Preach 
fo slave-holders the doctrine of gradual abolition, and they will not move 
a step. That doctrine has been preached for forty years past in our coun- 
try, most faithfully, and what has been the consequence ? We have gone 
on, adding slave state lo slave state, and increasing ou"* half a million ot 
slaves to two millions. The doctiine was preached in England, genera- 
tiqn after generation, with similar results. Attempts were made to regu- 
late and ameliorate slavery, but lo use the language of Fox in relation to 
the slave trade, it was like "attempting to regulate murder." At length, a 
few years since, the d 'Ctiine of immediate emancipation was preached. 
At first it met with great opposition, as it now does in this country. But 
It was still preached — converts multiplied— the reformation went on, until 
a majority of the people were immediate abolitionists. Then Parliament 
vas obliyed to act. 



21 

Thus far I have spoken of the doctrines of the Anti-Slavery Society.- • 
I come now to the exhibition of the plans and measmeti. The plan is 
simply this : to preach and publish the truth of God iii its application to 
the subject uf slave-holdimg — to induce ministers of the gospel at the 
South and the North to preach on this sin, as they do on all other sins, 
that is, affectionately, judiciously, but yet faithfully — to induce editors of 
papers and other periodicals to publish facts and discussions — to torni an- 
ti-slavery societies, for the purpose of publishuig and circulating intonna- 
tion and supportnig agents — lo carry the subject before ecclesiastical 
bodies, and obtain from them an expression of opinion, as has been done 
in the cause of missions and in the temperance cause, in this \^ay it is 
proposed to enlighten and reform and embody pubhc sentiment. It is 
proposed also to preach on this subject to Congress, by means of peli- 
lions tor the abolition of slavery in the Distiict of Columbia and the Ter 
ritories And as the retbrmation beginning at the iS orth shall extend South, 
abolitionists in the slave States— and they are already beginning to appear 
there — will petition their respective legislatures, and state after state 
will throw oli the system. Only let public sentiment all over the land be 
corrected, and put in motion, and slavery falls ; for it is public sentiment 
and nothing else, which sustains it. The plan, then, is to propagate the 
doctrines of the gospel in relation to slave-hoiding. But it is a-ked, what 
plan have we to propose to slave-holders and to the nation, to enable theni 
to get rid of the evil? We have no plan except to expose sin and urge du- 
ty. When we preach to distillers and rum-sellers, we do not give them 
any plan by which to extricate themselves ftom the business. We ^im- 
ply show them that they are doing wrong, and that they ought immediate- 
ly to stop and do right. We preach in the same way on this subject. — 
We point out the sin of holding slaves, and persuade to immediate repent- 
ance. But suppose the slave-holder says he cannot repent immediately. 
We reply, that perhaps he forgets what slav«-holding is. Can he not im- 
mediately commence teaching the slave to read the Bible? Yes. — 
Can he not resptct the marriage institution among ihe blacks, as much as 
among whites, and at once and forever abstain from acts that infringe upon 
it ? Yes. Can he not cease from buying and selling human beings, and 
thus, so far as he is concerned, give up at once the domestic slave-trade? 
Yes. Can be not immediatt'ly relinquish his claim of property in his 
slaves, and henceforth regard them and treat theai as men, that is, as 
moral ageiifs, and not as things ? Yes. Can he not begin at once to exert 
all his influence to procure a repeal of the slave laws? Yes. This, 
then, is immediate emancipation. The man who does this, does his duty. 
We ask nothing more than thai men renounce all that is wrong, and begin 
at once to keep the ten commandments. We are not politicians, nor de- 
visers of schemes. We only wish to see the mind and heart of the na- 
tion changed on this subject. When that is done, there will be plans e- 
^lough for abolishing slavery. As soon as the majoiity say it must be 
done in some way, it will be done in some way. And although there will 
doubtless be a preference as to ways, still if the object is only accomplish- 
ed by voluntary, peaceable means, abolitionists will not complain 

But some perhaps will say, that these are not the principles o( thorotiofi^ 
:^oing abolitionists. You will find that they are, if you will take the troub- 



le to examine, "lou may sometimes, in one of the abolition papers, fiuu 
these principles clothed in harsh and improper language, nevertheless these 
are their principles. Some have asked, why then use the word iminedi- 
«/t,wlien it misleads the p:iblic l;i regard to our real principles? We reply, 
the w ord immediate exjiresses our views better than any other, and there- 
lore we use it. Show us a better word, and we will use it. The pub- 
lic misunderstand us, because we have been misrepresented. VVe use the 
best meaus we can find, and explain what we mean by th(;m ; and if any 
will misunderstand us, and refuse to read our explanations, what can we 
do but to retain our phraseology, and go on explaining our meaning as fast 
as we can get men to listen? 

Our principles, then, and our plans are these : 1. The holding of slaves 
IS not merely an evil, like the plague or the cholera ; it is a tin. 2. Ini- 
mediafc repentance is a duty. 3. This doctrine must be preached through 
the land. I now desire your attention, while I notice several objections. 

First. It is objected that aboUfionisis use harsh language, and manifest 
a bad spirit. That tbey have sometimes used language unnecessarily 
harsh, and sometimes exhibited unkind feelings, I am free to confess, and 
I sincerely lament it. But I trust we have repented, and that we shall 
liereafter manifest more of the sfiirit of Christ — of his meekness, as well 
as of his boldness. It should be remembered, however, that abolitionists 
have been goaded on every side by misrepresentation, with slanderous 
report.-', wi h ridicule and contempt, with mobs, with abuse and opposition 
of every kind ; and when it is considered what poor human nature is, iti5 
not strange that we have sometimes used language that ought not to be used, 
and have sometimes suffered our feelings to pass beyond virtuous indig- 
nation against sin, into unkind feelings towards sinners. But who is per- 
fect in this respect? Luther, and Calvin, and Knox, acd many other re- 
formers, exhibited more of unchristian feeling than abolitionists have 
overdone; and yet their faults are passed over lightly. Some of the 
early writers and speakers on the subject of Temperance said many things 
that we considered at the time unkind. [ once heard an address by a 
(lislinguished man on temperance, which was the most severe tirade I ever 
hoard on any suject from the mouth of man. It made some angry; but 
it was set down to the account of excessive zeal, and easily pardened. If 
our principles are correct, (and I ask no mercy if they are not) why may 
not we come in for a share of this forgiveness of lighter faults ? Besides, 
ought we to be censured in the style in which we are, by our opposcrs ? 
At a highly respectable meeting in the city of New-York, of which the 
mayor was chairman, while the speakers were some of the best men in 
the country, such epithets as these were applied to abolitionists — " reck- 
less incendiarie-;," " wild fanatics'" " fire-brands," " blood-thirsty, rabid 
agitators." I have selected these terms from the speeches of three gen- 
tlemen of whom you have often heard. I will not mention their names, 
because I wish not to injure the reputation of men whom I have long re 
spected and loved. In many respectable papers, we have been accused 
of aiming at an infraction of the constitution, at insurrection, and every 
riling bad. In five of the cities of New England and New York mobs 



23 

have come out asjainst us,* and in one instance the mob was harrangiied 
by one of the mo.st respectable men in New England. And all this bil 
ter o|)[Josition has arisen against us, because we have declared to the 
world our honest opinions. I speak ot the treatment of our opposers, 
merely to sliow that we ought not to he demed all sympathy because we 
liave been guilty of faults which the rest of the world under similar ciicuni- 
stances have always fallen into, to an equal and often to a greater extent. 
Furthermore, let me here correct a mistake in relation to this t}iieslion 
touching wrong feeling. Some persons sup[)C>e that ail strong feeling on 
the part of abolitionists is v^rong feeling: but they forget that we have 
been s^earching into the cruelties of slavery — that we have been listening 
to the lamentations of the oppressed. They forget that we have heard 
from the best authority such facts as these: A genileman of bis acquaint 
ance," *iaid Mr. Ladd, " was offended with a female slave. He seized her 
by the arm, and thrust hei. hand into the fire, and there he held it, until it 
was bucnt off. I saw,'' r^aid Mr. Ladd, "the withering stump. "| Is it 
wrong to /ec/, when we hear of such things? Mr. Sutcliff, an English 
Quaker, who travelled in this country, relates this case : "A slave owner 
lost a piece of leather. He charged a httle slave boy with stealing it — 
The boy denied. The master tied the boy's feet, and suspended him 
trpm the limb of a tree, attaching a heavy weight to his ankles, as is usual 
in such cases, to prevent such kicking and writhing about as would break 
the blows. He then whipped. The boy confessed; and then he com- 
menced whipping anew for the offence itseif. At length the boy died un- 
der the lash. Then the slave-holder's own son, sniitted with remorse, ac- 
knowledged that he took the leather." Is it v.rong to- speak of these facts 
with emotion ? And when we recount these facts to our acquaintances, 
and they reply that there are many kind masters, and they do not wish to 

■''Tliis way before the late anti-abolition riots in Kew York, Philadelphia 
and other places. 

fit is said hat these are instances of cruelty which rarely occur, and that 
if we refer lo ihem at all as specimens of what slavery is, we ought alJ^o u< 
place heside ihein the instances of humanity whicliare much more conimorj. 
This reasoning is much like that of a maa i-.naigned formurder, who shouh! 
atiGinpt to justify himself on the ground that a single action is not a fair 
-jiecnnen of his character, and thai he ought not to be condemned for it. — 
\o one pretends that uU masters are cruel. But we say that the system 
which occasionally lends to such outraa;e, and which affords the slave nc' 
protect ion Agninsl it, is most cruel. Many masters, no doubt, treat their 
slafes as well as they can under the system — i. e. thei/ rob their fellow-men 
nf their dearest rights in as kind a wa,y as possible. I am sorry to be obli- 
ged to say things on this subject thai are severe: but it is the truth that is 
severe, and ttiat must not be suppressed. I think lam no' wanting in love 
10 our brethren of the South. I love their generosity and nobleness of cha- 
racter—but I cannot love their oppression. ^ And when I see them slumber- 
iu<; over this subject and refusing to act efficiently, trampling the slave in the 
dust and not appearing to know iha'. it is criminal, I consider that our duty 
ro them, as well as to the oppressed, requires us to speak plainly cut, and 
assure them that they are doing wrong. So long as they do not turn their 
"(Torts in earnest to the work of breaking up this system of iniquity, we 
must " cry aloud, spare not, and show the people their transgression.'" 



24 

hoar such stories, is it wrong to have fceUng then? Is it a sin to sympa- 
thize with the slave ! When we behold a proad and cruel nation stretching 
forth its hand of oppression to crush the faculties, and sending out its 
breath of prejudice to wither the hopes of an unoffending, helpless race, 
is it a sin to step forth and speak in their behalf, with all the feeling we 
have? Oh, my country ! am I doing wrong because I plead the cause of 
your down-trodden, speechless children, who cannot and who dare 
not plead for themselves ? VVil! you tell me that I am a man of bad spirit, 
because I am not cold hearted on such a subject as this ? "You can easil\ 
possess yourself of facts," says Samuel J. Mills, " the bare recital ot 
which will make the heart bleed. These facts must be proclaimed in the 
ears of the people, that they maybe induced to send the hope of the gos- 
pel to the expiring and de'>pairing slave." Shall we be called mad men. 
because we are deeply in earnest in this cause? because we in-ge our 
friends to listen to our facts, and read our publications ; because we can- 
not speak of the miseries and wrongs of the negro in a cool, calculating, 
heartless way ; because we consider the subject sufficiently important to 
be curried into our closets and into our prayer-meetings? I believe that 
any one who will put himself in our place, and look steadily a little while 
at the condition of the slave, will not blame us for having very strong 
feeling. 

2. Il is objected that J\Ir. Garrison is a hading man in the sociefij, and 
that his paper tends to produce insurrection. The cause of abolition does 
not depend upon M'-. Garrison, and it would be unjust to charge his faults 
on the society. His paper is not the organ of the society — he alone is 
responsible for it. He has injured himself and the cause of abolition by 
his harsh and undignified, and sometimes unchristian language. I dis- 
like his manner of treating this subject. Nevertheless, we should not 
condemn any man outright because he is not perfect, for according to 
that principle we should all be condemned. His character and his 
principles are not understood. As il respects the tendency of his paper 
to produce insurrection, there is a mi.-^take on that point. He inculcates 
the duty of submission and non-resii^tance. In one of his anti-.«lavcry 
hymns, he uses the following language : 

And yp who are like cattle soh', 

Bear meekly s'lill your cruel woes. 
Not bv the sworil your liberty 

Shall be ob'ained in human hlood— 
Not bv revoh or treachery- 
Revenge did never bring forth good. 
Goi'l''5 time is best — '(will not delay — 
E'pn now your cause is bjossomio?. 
This is not the language of an incendiary It is a happy thing that abo- 
htionists generally adopt the thorough-going Quaker principle in regard to 
the sword and self defence. Possessing as they do great influence over 
the blacks, they will be able to do more toward preventing insurrections 
than all the military power of the nation. So long es abolitionists are per- 
( tnitted to proceed with their plans, and thus to hold out to the oppressed 
he hope of doUvcrance, there will be little danger of insurrection. But 



25 

put down the abolitionists, and thus destroy all hoi)e, and you wd! see; 
sooner or later such convulsions as will make the nalion ireinble. Be- 
fore leaving Mr. Garrison it should be remarked, that severe language in 
reference m slavery is not to be censured. It would be treacherous to the 
interests of the victim, to speak of slavery m such language as to keep 
out of view its odiousness. Unuectssary severity, and especially all an- 
gry feeling, is of course wrong. But many persons seem to forget that 
there is another extreme into which they may run, and that it is just as 
wrong to use language that IS too soft and miid,as it is to use language which 
is too severe. They lorget too,that when any sin has become respectable. 
in consequence of the number and high standing of those who practice it, 
that we are in far greater danger of speaking too smoothly of it, than of 
speaking too harsnly. When we read the litis of the late King of Eng- 
land, and find hun spoken of as a good man, and all his vices palliated b) 
calling them ' youihful foibles," do we not say that the man who writes 
such a book encourages vice, and that his fault is more unpardonable than 
that of the man who exposes the vices of kings in language too severe f 
So in this case, while some abohtionists have been too severe, have noi 
the great body of the nation been quite as much in the wrong in covering 
up this sin with soft language, and with ejfcuses for the slave-holder? Lei 
It be observed, that in this sinful world, all moral truth which is not ab- 
stract and over our heads — all truth which relates to the heart and conduct 
of man — is and must be severe. The man who does not know this, has 
never yet learned to preach the gospel on any subject. 

3. It is objected that this is a poliiical question. I once feared that it 
would be so, and I hesitated long on this account, watching closely the 
movements of abolitionists, determining not to move in this business till 
I should be satisfied on this point. I am now thoroughly convinced that 
this reformation is to be a religious and moral, not a political reformation. 
It has commenced where it ought, at the house of God, among Chris 
tians. Political partizans, and particularly the mob of the country arc, 
and for some time to come will continue to be, opposed to it. Political 
men will at last take it up and carry it through Congress and through the 
State Legislatures — but that will not be done, until it shall have become 
a re/igioMs/ee/wo" throughout a majority of the nation that slavery must 
be abolished. The progress of this reformation in this country wdl doubt- 
less be similar lo -vhat it was in England, where for several years it was a 
moral question, and then for one year it was both a political and moral 
question. No evils arose in that country, from the bearings which this 
subject has upon politics — none need be apprehended in this country. 

4. It is objected that this Society encourages amalgamation. This is 
altogether false — a slander upon the Society, and it is the duty of chris- 
tians not only not to countenance this report, but to do what they can to 
counteract it. With the subject of intermarriages we have nothing to do. 
We do not'desire to see such things take place, nor on the other hand do 
we think it wise or proper to make lau'S against them. If, in here and 
there an instance, the two races shall intermarry, we shall consider them 
as persons of bad taste, and there we shall leave the matter. Those who 
dread amalgamation, do not consider that the very thing which they feat 
ia now taking place in all of the slave states at a tremendous rate, and tha^ 

c 



26 

cinaticipaliun will iinmcdiately check and at length nearly put an end to 
this sin. Abolitionisis firmly believe that their plans arc better fitted than 
any others to discourage amalgamation. 

5. // is objected that it would be dangerous and exceedinglij unwise to 
turn loose two inillious ef ignorant, vicious jiersons. So say we. "We 
have never advocated the /wcHing- /oose of slaves. On the contrary, we 
say it would be wrong ior the slave-holder to set them afloat on society, 
as vagabonds. He is bound to give them employment and to see that thev 
are instructed, and legislative bodies are bound to pass lavvs adapted to 
their condition. The emancipation of slaves from the arbitrary control 
of aa irresponsible oppressor, and placing them under the protection ol' 
law. is one thing, and turning them loose is another. The latter would no 
doubt be attended with serious evils — the foimeris safe. It is strange 
that some persons see such horrors in emancipation, when all theory and 
all experience tell us it is safe. We appeal to South Africa for proof of 
the satety of emancipation. We appeal to Mexico. Above all we refer 
YOU to St. Domingo. It those who talk of St. Domingo and its horrors 
will study thy history of that Island as presented by Clarkson, one of the 
most honest and candid men living, they will find that those dreadtul mas- 
sacres took place either before the emancipation of negroes, or at the 
tims when the attempt was made to reduce them back to slavery ; and that 
during the intermediate period of several years, every thing was quiet, 
the negroes continuing to work on the plantations as hired laborers. At 
this period, "the colony," says he French general, ''marched as by en- 
chantment towards its ancient splendor." Emancipation has taken place 
all over the Christian world, except in Brazd, a few of the \Vest India 
Islands and this country, and without any bad results. But it will be said 
that the emancipation has not been immediate. I reply that it has been 
in most cases either in the strict sense immediate, or an immediate change 
from slavery to apprenticeship for a few years — and give us apprenticeship 
such as thjy have in the British colonics and we shall rejoice, though we 
do not think that full justice has been done to their slaves. If difficulties 
and insurrections should arise in carrying the plan of apprenticeship into 
eftect, it will be, not because Parliament went too far, but because they 
did not go far enough Some will say that emancipation in the West In- 
dies docs not amount to much, — that it is ordy taking the .slave out of ihc 
hand-! of one master and placing him in the hands of another. This is a 
mistake. Tho difiorence between slavery as it now exists in this coun- 
try and every kind of apprenticeship is immense. 

Look at a;iprentice.ship in the British Colonies, and apply it to the 
four points of the defmition we have given and see how different is the 
condition of the blacks from what it was. First, — The right of property 
in man is f;)rcver abolished, and the negro is now responsible not to a mas- 
ter hut to the law, and this change breathes into his soul the energies and 
the hopes of a man. Second,— The institution of marriage is protected. 
Third, — The Bible and all kinds and degrees of instruction, are opened 
to the soul, and it is now as much the interest of the community and of 
the government to give instruction, as it before was to withhold it. 4th, — 
The internal slave-trade, the buying and selling of men as beasts, and all 
the abominations that result from this sin, are entirely at an end. Well 



27 

tnay the Englishman now lift up his head among niiin and say, there is not 
a slave in all our dominions. Give us such an emancipation bill as this, 
and though we will not say it is the best possible, yet we will gladly re^ 
ceive it. 

6. // is said the slave-holder loishes to get rid of slaverij, hut cannot.-^ 
We reply that he wishes for emancipation very much as the irreligious 
man wishes for religion. The sinner desires the reward of religion, but 
does not like to pass through the humiliating and troublesome piocess of 
conversion. So the slave-holder desires the blessings and safely of a 
different slate of society, but he loves his own interest so well, that he 
will never do any thing to the purpose if left to himself. The only way 
to make him act is to press trulh upon his conscience. 

7. It is objected, that this Societij sets itseJj up as scmctJ iig hew and 
pecidiar, and arrogates to itself some great discoveries on the subject of 
slavery ; all Christians, it is said are opposed to slavery, and what is the 
use then of making this noise. We reply that all Christians aie opposed 
to slavery in the same sense in which the whole church was opposed to 
war, and to heathenism, and to ignorance of the Bible, and to intemper- 
ance, before the establisiiment of Peace societies, and Missionary socie- 
ties, and Bible societies, and Sabbath Schools, and Temperance societies : 
i. e. thev are just enough opposed to it to keep silent and do nothing. — 
Their abolition faith is all dead faith. Their principles have been so long 
unused and laid by, that they are like the speculative belief which some 
men have in Clyistianity, which does them no good, but on the contrary 
aggravates their condemnation. '' Truths of all others the most awful 
and interesting," savs Coleridge, ''are too often considered as so true, 
that they lose all the power of truth, and lie bed-ridden in the dormitory of 
the soul, side by side with the most despised and exploded errors." 

8. It is objected that the Society is doing i othing — that it has rot emar- 
cipated any slaves. With equal propriety it might have been said that the 
abolitionists of England, the day before the passing of the emancipation 
bill, had done nothing, and emancipated no slaves. The cause of aboli- 
tion in this country has made surprising progress in the last \ear. The 
whole country is now thinking on this subject. The General Associntion 
of this State ha^ recently passed a resolution, declaring " that to buy and 
sell human beings, and treat them as merchandise, is an immorality incon- 
sistent with the Christian religion." The ecclesiastical bodies of two 
other New England Stales have [>assed similar resolutions. Very soon 
the subject will come up in the Presbyterian church, and measures will 
be taken to induce ministers and members of that church in slave-holding 
states to do their duty. Other churches will do the same ; and thus the 
reformation will go on, till public opinion shall be purified — and who 
knows not that public opinion can do every thing ? It puts down old go- 
vernments, and puts up new ones ; it can prostrate one system, and erect 
another on its ruins ; it can drive vice like a sweeping tornado from the 
world, and it can gather virtue in its arms like a guardian angel. Public 
sentiment, thou art every thing! Let thy voice, then, go forth, and utter 
its denunciations in the halls of slavery, and they will tall. Let the light 
of thy searching eye penetrate the recesses of selfishness, and sophistry, 
and sensuality, and all our darkness on this subject will be as noon-day. 



28 

l,ct the piotettion of thy powerful hand be extended to the black maiu. 
and he will be raised from the depths of his degradation, and the putting 
forth of the finyer at him will cease. 

9. // ts said thai it i . not time yet to commence the agitation of this sub- 
ject. When, then, will it be time ? We are preparing to convert the 
world ; and can we go and preach righteousness to others, while we are 

horishin^' in our own bosom one of the worst vices of heathenism ? Had 
WQ not better pull the beam out of our own eye, and then go and pull the 
;nute out of our brother's eye? We think we arc living on the borders ol 
the millennium ; and shall this sin be permitted to extend out into the mil- 
iennium — a dark premonitory of guilt into an ocean of light and purity? 
This sin lies across the path of all our benevolent efforts. In sending 
our Bibles and our tracts to other countries, we walk directly over the 
'iodies and minds of our own countrymen. We even enrich ourselves, 
and acquire the means of Christianizing the Hindoo and Chinese, by hea- 
thenizing the colored American. And with this inconsistency, written in 
letters of blood upon our national character— an inconsistency which all 
the world except ourselves can see- shall we say that it is not time yet 
\o commence the work of repentance? shall we keep these two millions 
o( the present generation in the dust, and gather about their immortal souls 
;still darker and heavier clouds of ignorance and pollution, and wait till the 
five millions of the next generation rise up before us, in a condition so be- 
set with difficulties that even abolitionists, with all their imputed reckless- 
ness will not dare do any thing? Go tell the impenitent sinner, along 
whose pathway the law and the gospel utter the curses^'bf God, that he 
may safely delay repentance, but tell not this impenitent nation that pro- 
-nastination is safe. . 

10. It is objected that the measures used by this Society will endanger tht 
Union W^e reply that the union has long been in danger, and that we are 
seeking to remove as speedily as possible U:ie grand cause of jealous) 
and irritation and danger to the union. The nation is diseased, and dis- 
ease is advancing fast upon the vitals of the country. This society urges 
an application of the remedy that can save us. The union of these stales 
must inevitably be broken up, sooner or later, if slavery continues. The 
sooner, therefore, emancipation begins, the better. But emancipation 
never will begin, unless it is first thoroughly discussed. Light and facts 
must be let in upon tlic whole nati(m. The law of God m relation to this 
subject must be faithfully preached and published throughout the land. — 
Do you say this is a delicate subject, and the agitation of it in any wa} 
will destroy the constitution. This is a libel on the constitution. Our con- 
stitution would not be worthy of respect, if there were any moral subject 
on which we could not safely preach the truth faithfully. What! do 
vou tell us that we are living under a constitution which will be destroy- 
ed if the sins of the nation are exposed — if the truth of God is fearless- 
ly preached. How could you more certainly bring the constitution into 
(:f)ntenipt, than by speaking so lightly of it? We think differently of the 
constitution. We respect and love it, and for the very reason that we be- 
lieve that we may preach the truth on any subject with safety. I miglit 
dwell lon.i on this topic, but there is not time. 1 will only say in di-'smiss 
iiig it, that such is the state of things in this country, and such the rela- 
tions which we sustain to the moral interests of the world, that if this re- 



29 

lurmation does not go forward, this nation is ruined, and the conversiou 
of the world thrown back none can tell how far. 

11. It is said that the Bible does not condemn slavery, nor require m- 
mediate emancipation. He who says so, foigets what American slavery is. 
Does the Bible sanction the continuance of the domestic slave-trade — the 
buying and selling of men as well as horses? Does it allow us to separate 
wives from husbands, and parents from children, and thus to break up fam- 
ilies and the m»titution of marriage ? Does it countenance the woise than 
papal doctrine of withholdmg from men not only the Bible, but all other 
books 1 Does it teach that an Ethiopian does not belong to himself, but 
to some other person — that he is to be accounted '' goods and chattels, to 
all intents and purposes," — that men iiiayhold;>rcpe)7i/in immdrtal beings 
created in the image of God 1 The whole spirit of the Bible is against 
such things. It is against oppression and injustice in every form, and sure- 
ly it condemns injustice so flagrant. And wh>itever it condemns as 
wrong, it requires should be immediately repented of. The idea of gradu- 
al repentance is not to be found in the Book. But it is said that there are 
some things in the Scriptures which appear to excuse, if not to justify 
slavery. So the Scriptures contain some things which appear to justify 
polygamy. The Mohammedan could make out a more plau.sible argu- 
ment in favor of this sin, than has ever been brought forward in justifica- 
tion of sla«'e-holders. The Bible has been quoted also in opposition to 
the doctrines of the temperance reform. It has been urged that the prin- 
ciple of total abstinence is not in the Bible ; and it is quite as difficult to 
satisfy an opposer of temperance on this point, as it is to satisfy an oppo- 
ser of abolition in regard to the sinfulness of slave-holding. Those who 
go to the Bible for aiguments in favor of doing wrong, seldom fail of find- 
ing something to answer their purpose. The time is coming, however, 
when men will be ashamed of their attempts to justify slave-holding from 
the word of God. But is farther said, there is no specific command on 
this subject. Suppose it were so. Neither is there any specific com- 
mand which forbids forgery. There is no mention whatever of forgery in 
the Bible. Is it therefore innocent? It is not true, hov.ever, that there is 
nothing specific in the Scriptures on this subject. In the 58th chapter 
of Isaiah, we find this passage: " Is not this the fast that I have chosen, 
to loo.-;e the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and let the 
oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke ]" There is also another 
specific command of the Bible, that forbids such slavery as we have been 
considering. It is the eighth command of the decalogue . Thou 
shall not steal. This forbids our taking any part of the property of anoth- 
er. But the holder of slaves takes the whole— the time, the wages, 4he 
body, the mind, every thing in short that can possibly be gTasped. YVe 
put the question, now, to conscience, are the principles of »-ight and 
wrong, are the requirements of God's law so contradictory, so absurd, that 
that they make it a high crime to steal even a dollar from one man, while 
they allow you to steal from another man all that he hath — his whole 
self?* 

*He that stealeth aman and selleth him. or if he be found in his hand^ 
V shall surely be put to death.— Ex6d. xxi. 16. 

c2 



3a 

Agiiin, it ts said that our Saviour and hu apostles did not preach agaiiisf 
^avery. The reason why the Saviour is silent on this subject, doubtless 
IS, that slavery did not then exist in Judea. The apostles afterwards came 
m contact with it, but did not attack it for two reasons : first, the slaver} 
with which they had to do was in one important respect diflerent from that 
which exists in our country. It did not require the shutting out of instruc- 
tion, and the consequent degradation of the soul. Terence, the poet, 
was a slave. Horace was the son of a freedman. The slaves of whom 
Paul .speaks in his epistles were not forbiddtn to read those epiir^tles. Se- 
condly,, the apostles attacked the proininent and irors^ sins of the age. 
Paul's preaching to the Athenians was directed against idolatry, because, 
as he passed through their streets, that was the worst sin he saw. Were 
he to visit the plantations of America, he would preach against slavery. 
He would not look upon a population denied the Bible and essentiaJl} 
heathen, though in the midst of an enlightened and Cliri.stian country, and 
yet keep silence. He would not see men treated as property, bought and 
sold a:> brulos, and then call it a delicate subject, and no concern of his. 

12. li is maintained thai expediency justifies the continuance of slavery, 
at least for the present. The word ixpediency is u^ed in diflerent senses. 
It has reference to the greatest good. We may mean the greatest good 
of the whole universe, throughout eternity, or we may mean the greatesi 
present good. Expediency understood in the first mentioned sense, as 
referring to the whole moral system in the long run, as it is called, is doubt- 
less to be regarded. But where expediency has respect to a part only ot 
the universe, and to a small segment only of the great circle of eternity 
the case is essentially changed. Expediency of the former kind, that is 
on the great scale, coincides exactly with right and the law of God. and is 
in fact but another name for right, and duty, and law — inasmuch as righf 
and law are founded upon regard to the greatest good, or general expedi- 
ency. But expediency of the latter kind, i. e. on the small scale, may be 
the same as selfishness and sin. And it is in this last mentioned sense 
that the word is commonly used. In no sense, consequently, does expe- 
diency justify a departure from the laws of God — for general expedienc} 
being the same thing in principle as the law of course requires the some 
thing, namely, obedience ; and partial expediency, for the very reason thai 
it is partial, cannot set aside the higher and paramount claims of the law. 
To render the point under consideration more clear, let it be illustrated 
(bus : Suppose that you owe an intemperate man ten dollars — that he de- 
mands payment of the debt — that you fear if you payhim he will go t(> 
the dram-shop, become intoxicated, and then go home and abuse his fam 
ily. What ought you to do in such a case? Expediency on the small scak 
says, withhold the money — at the best it can do him no good, and there 
is no danger that the consequences may be bad. On the other hand, the 
law of God and general expediency say, pay the man — you justly owr 
him, and you must not do wrong to prevent another from doing wrong. — 
Do rjoar duly, and leave the consequences with God. If you pay thf 
money, it may occasion sin and suffering ; but if you withhold it, you will 
break thro' a i)nncMple upon which the interests of the universe and eternit} 
ftnpend — you wtl! transgress the everlasting law of truth and honesty, and 



what is worse still, you will set up your opinion of what is best above that 
of the Supreme Kuler ; for he has told you that the best way to promote 
the general good is to render unto all their dues, whereas you decide that 
It is better in some cases not to render that which is due. You take if 
upon yourself to set aside the law of God, whenever you think that your 
own plan is better. But this must not be. However honestly you may 
ditier from God in your views of what is best, you must not disobey. K 
you are the owner of slaves, and honestly think that it is tor their interest 
not to have the Bible, nor to receive pay for the labor, you must not trans- 
gress the Divine law. Even it you could prove that it would be better 
for your bondsmen to continue as they are lor the present— a position that 
has been often taken, but never proved-^stiil you do not know that it will 
be better on the whole, on the broad scale of eternity, to deny them the 
privileges of freemen. So that you cannot prove it to be even expedient 
(understanding tlie worti ao it ought to be understood) to claim the right 
of property in your liellow men. 

13. It is said, that conceding all which has been advanced, still the best 
way to attack slavery is to preach the gospel, and thus undermine it by in- 
direct means. \N e say in reply, by all means preach the gosjiel, but be 
sure that you preach the icliole gospel — undeimine slavery, but doit in the 
only way m which it can be done, by attacking the false principles upon 
which it IS based. This indirect way of undermining slavery has been tried 
for years, and the system, instead of being weakened, has waxed stronger 
and stronger. So long as intemperance was attacked only in the indirect 
way, by preaching the gospel, as you call it, that is, by preaching against 
all other sins except the one to be destroyed, the sin grew worse and 
worse; but when the doctrine of total abstinence was announced, and 
urged directly, faithfully, in the faceK)f opposition, then intemperance was 
beaten back. So now, let the doctrine that it is a sin to hold property in 
man — a doctrine which strikes at the root ot the slave system — be faith- 
fully preached, and the whole system will come to the ground, and no other 
moral means can bring it down. Indirect means, and the doctrine of 
gradual repentance, will have the same effect upi)n slavery that the doc- 
trine of moderate drinking once had upon intemperance — they will per- 
petuate and increase the evil. 

14. I notice but one more objection. It is said that abolitionists op- 
pose the Colonization Society. It is not true that we wish to put down the 
colony at Liberia. We wish to have it prosper, and therefore we wish to 
prevent crowding its popuktio.. with vicious and improper persons. 1 
quote the following from Mi. Garrison's thoughts on Colonization : " Let 
(he colony continue to receive the aid and elicit the prayers of the good 
and benevolent. Blot it not out of existence. But hencefirth let it de- 
velope itself naturally. Crowd not its populati( n. Let transportation 
cease. Seek no longer to exile millions of our cilored countrymen ; for 
assuredly, if the Colonization Society succeed in its efforts to remove 
thousands of this number annually, it could not inflict a heavier curse up- 
on Africa, or more speedily assist in the entire subversion of the colony." 
Only let the colony be well managed, and we hojie that hereafter it will 
he; let ardent spirits be excluded, and the society is doing what it can 



S2 , 

lu bring this about; let the colony be made as Ikr as possible a Chnsliau 
colony for the benefit of Africa, and not a place for turning loose thou- 
sands of ignorant and vicious persons ; and we shall make no objectiorj 
to SMcft a colony. On the < ontrary, we will encourage it. Still we see 
no connection between a colony and the abolition of slavery, and but lit- 
tle connection between a colony and the spiritual good of Africa. Some 
of our objections to the Colonization Society are the following; and in 
order to show that they arc well founded, I will quote the words of the 
friends of the Society. Mr. Gerrit Smith, in his speech at the last annu 
al meeting of the society, remarked that " the belief is prevailing prett) 
rapidly at the North, that our society obstructs the dearly cherished cause 
of emancipation. I would that Ave had not given too much cause for the 
propagation of this belief. If there are apologies for slavery, it is not 
for our society to hunt them up. If there are eftbrts made for the aboli- 
tion of slavery, it does not belong to our society to oppose them. Our 
suciety,by offering such apologies and by opposing such efforts, has already 
cooled the ardor of many of its friends, and greatly multiplied its oppo- 
nents. The objection to our society is well taken, that in some of its 
publications it assumes the position that slavery in this country is to be op- 
posed by indirect means only, and that in the society, in itself alone, arc 
these means to be found." Mr. Smith proceeds : " There is another ob- 
jection to this society, which to my mind is still more weighty: it is, that 
it has been greatly, lamentably, wickedly deficient in pity of the free peo- 
ple of color. I will not deny to the colored man a perfect right to a home 
on this soil. I regret that any member of this society should ever have 
denied this right. It is no wonder to me that they have had feelings of 
jealousy towards us, and a want of confidence m the sincerity of our 
professions of kindness. We ourselves have given too much occasion 
tor this, in our speeches and publications. We have looked too little to 
their benefit, and too much to the (-olitical and social advantages which 
we supposed would arise to ourselves from the separation. And our pro- 
ject, which should have been held up as one of the purest and highest be- 
nevolence, has been degraded to a mere drain for the escape of this nui- 
sance." " Let us correct this, and place our society on its true ground ; 
let us make Africa a desirable home for men of color, and they will find 
their own way to its shores " Mr. Breckenridge, at the same meeting, 
said, "There is an immense aggregate of blame somewhere, and I want 
to find where it belongs, and put it there. Two years ago I warned the 
managers against this Virginia business. And yet they sent away two ship 
loads of vagabonds, not fit to go to such a place, and that were coerced 
away us truly as if it had been done with a cart whip." Mr. Bacon, at 
the same meeting, remarked, that "not'only the state of the society, but 
the condition of the colony, was such as must horrify every friend of the 
cause. He believed it would require an expenditure of fifty thousand 
dollars during the present year, to put the colony on a footing of prosper- 
ity." To such Colonizafionists we do not object ; and so soon as the 
society generally shall come into these views, and shall cease to stand in 
the way of efforts for the improvement and emancipation of the colored 
race, then the two societies can be like brothers in the same holy cause 
Till then, however, we consider it our duty to the slaves, to our country. 



33 

and to the Colonization Society, to state our objections honestly, fearless- 
Jy, yet kindly. That spirit of unkindness which has been so common on 
both sides, it is hoped will cease. 

And now, my friends, I have placed before you the principles and de- 
signs of the Anti-Slavery Society. I leave it for you to decide what your 
duty is to the slave, or whether you have amj duty to discharge to him. — 
For myself, I feel impelled, by all there is of humanity and religion within 
me, to engage in this cause. I know that I do it with the disapproba- 
tion of friends whom I love and respect ; but my conscience will not let 
me do otherwise. I must go with the abolitionists. I must go and take 
my stand with them, between the oppressor and the oppressed, and with 
one hand stretched out to the oppressor, we will say, repent ; and with the 
other stretched out to the oppressed, we will say, avenge not yourselves. — 
This is our ground, and no power on earth will be able to drive us from it ; 
for we stand upon the great principles of Christianity. We have on either 
side the pillars of truth and justice. We have with us our Bible and our 
God. And think you we can ever abandon such ground as this ? We have 
beheld the tears of the oppressed, %vho have no comforter. We have un- 
dertaken to plead their cause, and we mean to plead it, so long as we 
have a voice to lift up in their behalf. At the North and at the South, we 
mean to plead their cause. Whenever the spirit of slave-holding exists, 
we shall preach repentance. Say not that we are wanting in courage, be- 
cause we do not go to the South. We are there already, and we shall 
soon be there in greater numbers. We shall go there, and say unto 
slaves, Obey your masters, and unto masters, Crive unto your slaves that 
ivhich is just and equal. We wish not insurrection. We are men of 
peace. We have thrown away entirely and forever the sword of man, 
and have taken in its place the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of 
God. If the enemies of truth shall sometimes be stirred up to anger, we 
shall not be in fault. They will soon learn that we tell them the truth, 
not because we are their enemies, but because we are their friends — not 
because we are wild fanatics, but because we are honest Christians — not 
because we have not studied the subject, but because we have studied it 
— not because we are reckless of consequences, but because we confide 
in the principles of God's government more than in the bare assertions of 
man. The discussion of this subject will doubtless make noise, but bet- 
ter have the nuise of argument than the slumber of guilt. We are sleep- 
ing upon a volcano. Let truth, therefore, go abroad, and awake the na- 
tion before it shall be too late. The nation is beginning to awake. The 
wheels of 'a mighty moral revolution are beginning to roll, and they will roll 
on — for the hand of the great Friend of the oppressed is moving them. 



54 W 
















,-*'^ . 















o > 







r^-'o '^^^ .♦^ 















•^-./ 










i9^^ 




5^^ 



'^i. ^:^im^^* J^ 




^*^%« 
^^-V. 






*^^* 
.%^"^. 







"^ -,^.^^jrv ^j; 




^<v <^ ' . . • 















^0* ♦•'■Jx!'* 'o^ 4i 



iP'/l, 




* 6 •'*•'» 




• H O 




**..♦* 











.♦ 



i^-'S^ 













> 



• o* 



J\C^- 






v,.*-* 



